Between them PKF and the Football League have created a vacuum. The long delay in naming Pompey’s owners is filled with silence from official sources. Despite the club being on the Football League agenda Thursday still nothing has been resolved.

The official answer to fans asking questions of the Football League has been the same for the last few weeks. Every e-mail has received a reply containing the same paragraphs:

'It is for the Administrator to select his preferred bidder for the club. The Administrator is aware that any such bidder must meet The Football League’s requirements including the terms of the Owners’ and Directors’ Test,' said a league spokesperson.

'Once the preferred bidder has been selected the matter will be considered formally by the League Board.'

Notwithstanding the faint whiff of ‘pass the buck’ here it is clear that the FL have not yet received the name of PKF’s ‘preferred bidder.’ Fans are still left in the dark as to what the future of the club holds – more of Portpin’s management or a new beginning under the aegis of the Pompey Supporters’ Trust.

Nature abhors a vacuum – as does your average Pompey fan. So it is no surprise that the vacuum has been filled with speculation. Speculation based on opinion, informed opinion, facts and analysis, along with a certain amount of ‘misinformation.’ 

It is easy to spot the latter. This is usually from someone making a vague and unfounded claim such as ‘Most Pompey fans just want an excuse to get mashed on a Saturday’ or ’99.9% of fans are not interested in the ownership situation’ or the more interesting proposition that ‘Portpin are not the devil incarnate.’ When challenged on such assumptions the speculators cry out that you are not allowing them to express their opinion, that you are bullying them and abusing them. But seldom to you get a rational discussion.

Let us get one thing straight here. There is a vast distance between having the right to an opinion and having the right to not have that opinion challenged. This is the difference between being able to express your views and having your views taken seriously. To qualify for the latter you need to be able to back your opinion with evidence, facts and some sound analysis.

Fans uninterested in the ‘politics of Pompey’ are entitled to ignore such issues. Many have been so sickened by it they have ceased to visit Fratton Park at all, according to Pompey ISA  and SOS Pompey sources. But those that assert, ‘it doesn’t matter who owns us,’ seriously need to be challenged on that unsubstantiated view. It does matter. It matters down to the very existence of the club itself. When those views are expounded in any public medium; TV, Radio, Press or internet, then it is important to put them to the ‘evidence, facts and analysis’ test rather than to allow them to stand and misinform at will.

Some sound analysis based on solid eye-witness and documented evidence has been poured into the vacuum over the last two weeks. Like liquid dynamite, a searing series of twelve articles by Micah Hall has appeared on this site in the last two weeks (starting here and with more to come). These have exposed Portpin’s involvement with PFC since August 2009 to the internet world and beyond. The national press have sat up and taken notice. The question of the eligibility of Portpin’s directors to own the club has been bust wide open.

The Premier League/Football League Owners and Directors’ Test has the clear aim of preventing anyone from protecting their own position by putting a club into administration and thereby denying all other creditors payments due to them. In doing so they include, as a safety net, all those with influence on a club who effectively operate as shadow directors.  (See full rules here; relevant clauses are under heading ‘Club Director’ clauses (g) and (h).)

The debate is – are Portpin’s directors proper owners for a Football League Club? The answer is based on matching the definition in the League’s own rules with the actions of Portpin’s directors in relation to PFC in the past. Portpin have been reluctant to answer Hall’s version of events stating, via Tavistock, their PR agency, “Our decision not to comment on Mr Hall’s blogs to date should in no way be taken as an acknowledgement of these unfounded, unsubstantiated and defamatory allegations.”

Portpin are not prepared to engage in the debate. Like the unsubstantiated opinions and misinformation appearing across various media they make an assertion unsupported by evidence, fact or proper analysis. By my measure they have not earned the right to have their statement taken seriously. The evidence that they have asked to be judged by themselves in the past – their actions – substantially supports Hall’s view. Indeed, the niggling little article in the Telegraph today which suggests that a PST owned club would be shut out of Fratton Park by Portpin, adds one more iota of proof (if in fact it's true) to my opinion that Portpin do not have, nor ever will have, the best interests of PFC at heart.

No empty PR words from them will convince me otherwise. Like Micah Hall, I say to Portpin – if you can disprove what is said, if it is truly unfounded and unsubstantiated, come out and prove it to be so. Otherwise I, and many others, will continue to question your suitability to own our football club.

The vacuum created by the indecision of PKF and the Football League, who both seem equally unwilling to act in the matter of PFC ownership will continue to rattle with the sound and fury of public opinion. In a world where football was a well-governed sport this would have been resolved before Pompey got anywhere near a second insolvency event in as many years.

The tide has to turn in favour of proper governance, and soon. The Football League above all has the opportunity to take a stand right here, right now. If they don’t take it on this evidence –what will it take for them to act in football’s true interests? 

Follow @SJMaskell

Follow @Pompey_Fans

The views of SJ Maskell are their own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial view of pompey-fans.com

Click here to sign up for an account and reserve your username! You can then post on the Forum and add your comments to articles

Photo: Action Images

thedubster added 14:36 - Oct 15 But does the FL have the proof, let alone the balls to reject Portpin? PKF are rumoured to be scared that Chanrai will sue them if they go with PST and he loses money as a result (especially because of PKF's ever-increasing fees) so it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the FL will bottle it too because regardless of how much we want to believe all the revelations, they are pretty much hearsay in the eyes of the law and will their lawyers advise them it's enough? Ironic when the FL seem to make up the rules to suit themselves much of the time to suit the circumstances

0

Derby County Polls